It’s important to grasp that hydrogen is finally above all a way to store nuclear energy. Full stop. Abundant nuclear causes, indeed requires, abundant hydrogen.
Happily, the drowsy USA energy system seems to stir with the switching on of the two new Vogtle nuclear plants in Georgia. Tom Fanning, recently retired CEO of Southern Company to whom we are most indebted for the plants, was the rare CEO who did not succumb in the land of the Lotus Eaters. On 31 May in Georgia, the US Secretary of Energy rightly said, “Okay, two down, 198 to go,” by 2050. Let’s make a growing fraction of the 198 reactors high-temperature machines that can thermochemically make the hydrogen that sustain the USA on the track of Decarbonization on beyond methane.
Between 50 and 80 percent of the energy value of clean electricity is lost in the process of making hydrogen and then burning it to generate electricity.
Meanwhile, enhanced CO2 is greening the planet. The supply of CO2 that is available to plants via the atmosphere is likely the most limiting circumstance faced by plants. Increased CO2 enhances plant water use efficiency. So, grain yields are increasing due to this, fertilization, improved weed control and better soil management. The deserts are greening.
Methanol or downstream derivatives (eg ethanol) isn't exactly carbon free, at least not yet, but it's a handy way to solve the energy storage problem, as well as ensure energy security.
The missing ingredient, to exploit abundant but intermittent electrical energy, or to exploit an intermediate product of H2 without having to tackle the complications of its long distance transport or compression, may perhaps be an engineered bioprocess of some sort.
Even more simply, the intermittent energy surplus can be used simply to desalinate, pump the water long distances, and then irrigate where it was not possible before. Thus supporting bulk biomass in a fairly traditional way, apart from the scale of the enterprise made possible by the newfound wealth of solar/wind power. Such projects are also at once simple, and transformational, especially for so much of the "Global South".
Actual H2 molecules as a direct means of energy storage and transport remains problematic. It's entirely possible that next gen battery tech already in the pipeline will produce a better solution there.
i don't think you just want to just use intermittent energy surplus for hydrogen. You want to have dedicated Hydrogen production with battery to deal with intermittent nature of renewables. After all, low utilization of electrolysis really isn't ideal.
I'm not suggesting to transport H2 directly, but rather through ammonia, methanol or other form of "green" products.
Oh I see. Electrolysis (or something equivalent) of the ammonia, combined with a separation technology, when consuming the stored energy. Presubably with the N2 potentially recycled, in forming the next batch of NH3 -- and in that NH3 formation process, recovering some of the energy used in splitting the previous NH3. That could be elegant at plant-scale.
Seems like there would be additional questions applying this to the transport problem vs the storage problem (e.g. the energy cost of producing or transporting pure N2). For that scenario, CH3OH probably the winner, since no problems transporting hydrocarbons.
The H2O electrolysis utilization being low, at first glance, seems like perhaps a lesser issue.
Yep that part ( N2 + 3 H2 => 2 NH3 ) is straightforward. The reverse reaction is also not too bad. In most simplified theormodynamic view, the energy to get the H2 out of the NH3 when "using it", is 92 kJ/mol for 3 H2, vs 286 kJ/mol for the synthesis of water, ( 2 H2 + O2 => 2 H2O ) , consuming 2 H2.
So with that 3:2 ratio, if 100% of H2O synthesis energy output could be extracted, about 21% would need to be used to dissociate the NH3 which provided the H2. If 60% of H2O synthesis energy output could be extracted (ie a more realistic fuel cell efficiency), then about 1/3 of the H2 fuel cell's actually captured energy output must go toward dissociating NH3 to produce H2 if that the intermediate product that feeds the fuel cell. Not too bad. Perhaps further advances exist in the fuel cell tech, which combine both reactions, and improve on this, no idea.
I don't think hydrogen will be used for steel production or long duration storage. Thermal batteries and/or pumped hydro will be good enough for long duration storage.
H2 Steel isn't a good idea. H2 steel requires very high grade iron ore (4% of current reserves). Normal ore needs to be processed before going through direct reduction. Electrolytic steel production by Boston Metals is probably the best viable strategy.
It’s important to grasp that hydrogen is finally above all a way to store nuclear energy. Full stop. Abundant nuclear causes, indeed requires, abundant hydrogen.
Happily, the drowsy USA energy system seems to stir with the switching on of the two new Vogtle nuclear plants in Georgia. Tom Fanning, recently retired CEO of Southern Company to whom we are most indebted for the plants, was the rare CEO who did not succumb in the land of the Lotus Eaters. On 31 May in Georgia, the US Secretary of Energy rightly said, “Okay, two down, 198 to go,” by 2050. Let’s make a growing fraction of the 198 reactors high-temperature machines that can thermochemically make the hydrogen that sustain the USA on the track of Decarbonization on beyond methane.
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-environmental-trinity?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=119454&post_id=145916873&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=16k&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Between 50 and 80 percent of the energy value of clean electricity is lost in the process of making hydrogen and then burning it to generate electricity.
Meanwhile, enhanced CO2 is greening the planet. The supply of CO2 that is available to plants via the atmosphere is likely the most limiting circumstance faced by plants. Increased CO2 enhances plant water use efficiency. So, grain yields are increasing due to this, fertilization, improved weed control and better soil management. The deserts are greening.
energy efficiency on the recent alkaline electrolysis is between 70 to 80%. For PEM & AEM, I have seen up to 95%. So, this is pretty good actually
Methanol or downstream derivatives (eg ethanol) isn't exactly carbon free, at least not yet, but it's a handy way to solve the energy storage problem, as well as ensure energy security.
The missing ingredient, to exploit abundant but intermittent electrical energy, or to exploit an intermediate product of H2 without having to tackle the complications of its long distance transport or compression, may perhaps be an engineered bioprocess of some sort.
Even more simply, the intermittent energy surplus can be used simply to desalinate, pump the water long distances, and then irrigate where it was not possible before. Thus supporting bulk biomass in a fairly traditional way, apart from the scale of the enterprise made possible by the newfound wealth of solar/wind power. Such projects are also at once simple, and transformational, especially for so much of the "Global South".
Actual H2 molecules as a direct means of energy storage and transport remains problematic. It's entirely possible that next gen battery tech already in the pipeline will produce a better solution there.
i don't think you just want to just use intermittent energy surplus for hydrogen. You want to have dedicated Hydrogen production with battery to deal with intermittent nature of renewables. After all, low utilization of electrolysis really isn't ideal.
I'm not suggesting to transport H2 directly, but rather through ammonia, methanol or other form of "green" products.
Oh I see. Electrolysis (or something equivalent) of the ammonia, combined with a separation technology, when consuming the stored energy. Presubably with the N2 potentially recycled, in forming the next batch of NH3 -- and in that NH3 formation process, recovering some of the energy used in splitting the previous NH3. That could be elegant at plant-scale.
Seems like there would be additional questions applying this to the transport problem vs the storage problem (e.g. the energy cost of producing or transporting pure N2). For that scenario, CH3OH probably the winner, since no problems transporting hydrocarbons.
The H2O electrolysis utilization being low, at first glance, seems like perhaps a lesser issue.
See this https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fec06dcce-17fb-4d1c-9989-ab3255899867_800x450.webp
you can see H2 created and then combined with N2 to make ammonia as part of Mingyang's integrated ammonia plant
Yep that part ( N2 + 3 H2 => 2 NH3 ) is straightforward. The reverse reaction is also not too bad. In most simplified theormodynamic view, the energy to get the H2 out of the NH3 when "using it", is 92 kJ/mol for 3 H2, vs 286 kJ/mol for the synthesis of water, ( 2 H2 + O2 => 2 H2O ) , consuming 2 H2.
So with that 3:2 ratio, if 100% of H2O synthesis energy output could be extracted, about 21% would need to be used to dissociate the NH3 which provided the H2. If 60% of H2O synthesis energy output could be extracted (ie a more realistic fuel cell efficiency), then about 1/3 of the H2 fuel cell's actually captured energy output must go toward dissociating NH3 to produce H2 if that the intermediate product that feeds the fuel cell. Not too bad. Perhaps further advances exist in the fuel cell tech, which combine both reactions, and improve on this, no idea.
I don't think hydrogen will be used for steel production or long duration storage. Thermal batteries and/or pumped hydro will be good enough for long duration storage.
H2 Steel isn't a good idea. H2 steel requires very high grade iron ore (4% of current reserves). Normal ore needs to be processed before going through direct reduction. Electrolytic steel production by Boston Metals is probably the best viable strategy.